SURREY County Council (SCC) has lifted itself above some of the worst performing local authorities in the country.

However, the Audit Commission has still scored it worse than two-thirds of other councils in its latest performance ratings.

Surrey has been given a score of two out of four, meaning it is providing an ‘adequate’ service to taxpayers.

In March, the public services watchdog gave the council a one-star rating, making it one of the worst four authorities in the country.

Despite the improvement, no area of the county council has been judged to be performing ‘well’ or ‘excellently’ by the Audit Commission.

The findings have been published in the commission's annual comprehensive area assessments (CAA).

Councils are judged in five key areas: managing performance, use of resources, managing finances, governing the business and managing resources.

SCC scored two out of four in each category. Only 11 out of 152 authorities were given the lowest rating of ‘poor’.

Surrey was issued with a government improvement notice in 2008 after an Ofsted review exposed serious failings in its children’s services department.

The education watchdog has since rated Surrey’s children’s services as adequate.

In July, departing interim chief executive Michael Frater delivered a damning verdict on the council, stating it was in denial about its problems and had developed a culture of bullying and arrogance.

Then a report published on December 3 placed Surrey’s social care services in the bottom eight of all UK local authorities.

"Clear vision"

The audit commission’s latest assessment, released on Wednesday, said: “While there have been some improvements, services such as those, for example, for vulnerable people, are variable.

“Adults who rely on social care receive adequate services. Access to services and how they are delivered are not consistent across the county and the council is doing more to improve this.”

Council leader Andrew Povey, who replaced Nick Skellett in June, said the new administration, which included a revamped senior management team and chief executive, had done a lot of work to turn around the authority.

“We all share a determination to give Surrey’s residents outstanding services across the board,” he said.

“Many were first-rate a year ago – such as adoption, fostering and trading standards – and we’re striving to ensure many more join them.

“For example, we’ve made enormous progress in protecting vulnerable children and our youth justice service has outstanding prospects.”

The CAA accepted that Dr Povey had provided a clear leadership on how he wanted to see the council operate.

“The council’s longer term vision and priorities have not always been clearly stated, in particular which areas are considered the highest priority,” the assessment said.

“The council has acknowledged this weakness and following recent elections is developing a clear vision of what it wants to achieve for local people.”

However, Hazel Watson, Surrey leader of the opposition Liberal Democrats, said the council’s performance was still unimpressive.

“Surrey residents deserve better,” she said. “They should expect good value for money services but this has not been delivered by the Conservative administration.

“There is a lot of room for improvement in the way the council is run and there is no room for complacency.

“The Conservative administration is still wasting too much money on running an inefficient and bureaucratic organisation. It is cutting services Surrey residents want instead of cutting bureaucracy.”

Funding

Meanwhile, the county council has said it is one of six local authorities to be given the lowest increase in central government funding for 2010/11.

Dr Povey said it meant a small rise in council tax was now "inevitable" for the next financial year.

The council said its funding for 2010/11 had been set at £127.5m, up £1.8m (1.5%) from the current year.

It added that the average rise for county councils was just under 4%, and 2.6% for all types of local authority.

Dr Povey commented: “The people of Surrey expect to have a reasonable level of public services for a prosperous, modern society.

"The county council has ambitious aspirations on their behalf and the government has failed to support them – a 1.5% rise falls way short of the 4% for other counties.

“The people of Surrey make a net contribution of £5.5bn annually to the government, or £5,100 for every man, woman and child in the county. That is far more than many other parts of the country contribute.

"This settlement reinforces how unfairly the people of Surrey are treated by the government.

“Money is tight for everyone and nobody likes paying more, but with council tax funding more than 80% of our services, a small rise – a maximum of 2.5% – is now inevitable for 2010/11.

"However, when I was elected leader in June I made value for money one of this council’s core principles and requested Public Value Reviews of all services over the next three years.

"These will focus on reducing costs and raising performance so that we can be sure we are providing residents with the best and most efficient services possible within the funds available to us.”